"The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed...He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath..."
Psalm 2:2-5 KJV
OTHER QUESTIONABLE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PROJECTS
HBG Gets More Than Bridges
Bridges are not the only questionable contracts that HBG has received in California. A series of public/private toll roads in southern California, whose necessity was difficult to justify, were awarded to HBG and other contractors. In 1989, the California state legislature authorized private companies to build four different toll roads in a pilot project. (A NJ court has since been ruled that it is unconstitutional for the government to transfer its right of eminent domain to a private company.) Certain government incentives were granted to companies building the roads. The experiment towards privatization of transportation was pushed by many, including libertarian Robert Poole of Reason magazine. One of the main reasons for the push for toll roads is that it is easiest to pay using transponders that automatically debit the users' bank accounts. This is part of so-called intelligent transportation, the ultimate aim of which is to enable the government to keep track of the movement of its citizens using Global Positioning System (GPS). This phase of the experiment was a success, but the supposed intended purpose, to efficiently improve the taxpayers' transportation system, was a complete failure. Only one of the roads has ever been built, the 91 Express Lanes. You won't read that in Reason. (And by the way, why would a libertarian push for infrastructure allowing the government to invade the public's privacy?)
After the 91 Express Lanes opened, by July 1998 the average daily traffic (ADT) was more than 27,500 cars per day, according to California Private Transportation Co. (CPTC) who owns the road. Then in October 1998 a competing toll road opened, the Eastern Toll Road, whereupon the ADT for 91 Express Lanes dropped to 17,500. CPTC would not provide more recent figures. Now that the 91 Express Lanes is an economic loss, no one will buy the road from CPTC. CPTC's failure led other contractors to view such projects not as a long-term investment, but as a lucrative, one-time, no-bid construction contract. Because of the questions surrounding the 91 Express Lanes, Attorney General Bill Locklyer opened an investigation into the project and its bond financing.
As I mentioned above, the reason the 91 Express Lanes was a failure is that the state of California authorized another competing toll road, the Eastern Toll Road. It turns out that HBG was one of the companies that received this contract. They were part of the Silverado Constructors team which underbid the contract by an incredible $115 million. The Eastern Toll Road was one of three toll roads which were built by the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), a multi-jurisdictional authority with the responsibility of building a 68-mile beltway system around Orange Co. The other two toll roads of this plan are the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SJHTC), a 15-mile toll road which was opened in November 1996. The third toll road is the Foothill Transportation Corridor (FTC), a 28-mile toll road which is partially completed. Of these three mega-projects, HBG received contracts for two of them.
The following is an example of how the system works. In 1996 TCA honored Congressman Ron Packard (R-Oceanside) with its first "Visionary Award" for his support of innovative federal legislation for the toll roads. In 1998 he got legislation passed exempting the Foothills South Parkway from laws preventing highway construction in parks-as a result, San Onofre State Park lost 77% of its land to the highway project. Then Packard received $2,000 from Flatiron in 1998 in campaign contributions, and Flatiron received the contract for the Foothills South road construction.
According to TCA's chief Mr. Wally Kreutzen, there was no way to fund these projects so TCA explored funding alternatives. Kreutzen says that they were considering a new option, long-term fixed-rate project financing and a federal line of credit. But in 1993, the federal tax code prohibited federal guarantee of tax-exempt credit. But don't worry, Uncle Sam came to the rescue. The 1996 DOT Appropriations Act broadened the uses of the federal line of credit: it is now available as a total safety net in case toll revenues don't cover debt service, road maintenance, etc. Kreutzen said this put the finishing touches on garnering support for the project: the federal government endorsed it by supplying their financial support. He pointed out that Congress used a $17.6 million subsidy to support two lines of credit (for two toll projects) totaling $240 million, which in turn supported $2.7 billion in projects. This is a leveraging ratio of 153:1. Just to give an idea of the size of these projects financially-speaking, the largest municipal bond offering ever in the U.S. was on July 15, 1999 when TCA issued $1.5 billion worth of bonds to refinance the original bonds for these projects. Demand was so high there were almost three times as many orders as bonds. When the San Joaquin Hills toll road was originally financed on March 2, 1993, it was the largest start-up toll road financing in U.S. history. And the design/build contract for the road was the largest design/build contract in U.S. history.
In spite of the illusion that these projects are privately financed, the opposite is true. An October 8, 1998 TCA memo admitted that revenue from the completed portion of the Foothill/Eastern Toll Road was insufficient and required taxpayer subsidy. California taxpayers had already paid for a $2 million repaving of the San Joaquin Toll Road just two years after it was completed. This also provided further proof that TCA had overestimated ADT. When TCA pushed for the project, they predicted an ADT of 100,000. In actual fact, after it was built the ADT was less than half that, which racked up daily losses of $100,000. And the TCA also grossly underestimated the costs of the San Joaquin Hills toll road, which cost $4.6 billion more than originally estimated.
Mr. William Woollett Jr. was the head of TCA during all these financial shenanigans, when they established a reputation for "raw power, secrecy and financial instability." According to Tom Rogers, head of the Orange County Republican Party in the '70s, "If you wanted to show a bureaucracy that is absolutely unresponsive to the public, the TCA under Bill Woollett would be a textbook case. Woollett epitomizes the arrogance of the toll-road agency, which is perhaps the most unresponsive agency in Orange County, if not in the state of California." In order to hide the financial catastrophe from the public, all TCA board members had to sign non-disclosure agreements. One board member said that Woollett's staff "threatened us--forcefully--to keep our mouths shut. They didn't want the public to know that the toll road is a financial disaster."
Woollett was succeeded by the aforementioned Kreutzen, who was his financial wizard during Woollett's tenure as Irvine's city manager from 1971-1989, before he came to TCA. Originally TCA estimated the cost of the toll roads at $350 million-now their calculations under Woollett put the price at $5 billion. Woollett appears to be against democracy, fending off investigations into the affairs of his public office. One critical TCA board member said that the staff "act[s] as if the agency belongs to them personally and is not accountable to the public." Woollett spent $4.8 million on the agency's headquarters (when the building was only valued at $3 million) and gave his staff extravagant salaries, cars and cash for unused leave.
According to one investigative television report, the toll roads had not generated a dime of income for the investors as of 1999, because of reduced demand, and it appeared the entire toll road scheme was just a ploy to provide access to undeveloped land. Coincidentally, both Woollett and TCA's chief engineer, Jerry Bennett, announced their plans in the summer of 1998 to retire after the Eastern Toll Road was completed (it opened in a few months on 10/18/98).
The Alameda Corridor Project
I might also mention in passing, since the COSCO attempt to take over the Long Beach port was discussed, that another highway project was developed to facilitate the flow of goods out of the Long Beach and Los Angeles ports. These two harbors together are the third largest containerized port in the world. The two port commissions contributed $400 million to the plan. A key component was a loan from the federal government for $400 million. The project will cost $2 billion, and the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority (ACTA) plans to issue approximately $785 million worth of bonds. It turns out that Balfour Beatty purchased two U.S. rail companies in April 2000, Marta Track Constructors and Metroplex Corporation. Marta Track received a major construction contract for the Alameda Corridor Rail project. All this seems somewhat coincidental in light of the Chinese involvement at Long Beach, and Hutchison Whampoa's moving into ports all over the world. This pattern will become more evident throughout this paper.
Peter Kiewit & Sons - the Dutch Connection?
Peter Kiewit & Sons is the largest North American road contractor, headquartered in Omaha. It was founded in 1884 by two brothers whose father was a Dutch immigrant from The Hague. They have built more miles of interstates than any other contractor. In 1951 they built the top-secret air base at Thule, Greenland. In 1952 they built the $1.2 billion gaseous diffusion plant in Ohio, one of the largest government contracts ever let. Peter Kiewit & Sons also received the contract for the $780 million San Joaquin Hills Toll Road. This may or may not be significant, but all the contracts awarded by TCA went to construction firms with Dutch connections, but I never could establish a direct connection between them and the Dutch company HBG. It makes one wonder what is going on, especially in light of the events of September 11 and the fact that some of the Muslim terrorist pilots involved in those tragic events were being trained by Dutch nationals at the Venice, Florida airport. Later in this report I will detail more suspicious and evil activities associated with the Netherlands.
Kiewit was a member of the Shea-Kiewit-Kenny (SKK) consortium on various rail projects for the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). Along with the old and respected testing firm Twining Laboratories, they were all investigated for product substitution and false certifications on those projects (2002 National Fraud Conference on Highway Construction and Public Transportation). In 1993 SKK bored into an underground river, stopping construction for six months from floods (The Nation, 9/18/95). The next summer, SKK caused evacuations and closure of nine blocks. Tom Hayden found that ten contractors spent $579,000 in campaign contributions and lobbying in 18 months. On June 22, 1995, a 70'-deep sinkhole appeared on Hollywood Blvd. from their construction. On July 11, 1995 the FBI raided SKK's offices to collect evidence of their negligence. So-called "change orders" paid out over $230 million over budget, and internal audits show that MTA contracts typically cost more than three time original bids.
As a further example of how this web of corruption is intertwined, see the Kiewit connection in the discussion below on Freyssinet.
THE OAKLAND BAY BRIDGE
The following may appear slightly off topic at the moment, but its significance will become more apparent later when you see the company T.Y. Lin teamed with HBG on the east coast. It also serves to illustrate how corruptly the state of California and Caltrans awards contracts. I'm omitting many of the details for brevity.
In 1989 the Loma Prieta earthquake damaged the eastern span of the bay bridge between San Francisco and Oakland. It was determined by Caltrans that the bridge would not stand another earthquake, yet to this day the bridge has not been satisfactorily repaired. At first it was proposed to retrofit the bridge, but after almost seven years of study it was not deemed feasible. Instead, Caltrans proposed to replace the bridge.
A commission, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) was selected to choose a bridge design. MTC appointed another commission, the Engineering Design Advisory Panel (EDAP), to select the design. Caltrans took the unusual move of creating an EDAP subcommittee, appointing as chair Mr. Charles Seim of T.Y. Lin International, a bridge design firm. EDAP "considered" 12 different designs, and rejected 8 of them after only a brief discussion (www.oaklandbridge.com). The four that remained were all submitted by engineering firms that had employees on EDAP. It appeared that the other 8 were only invited to lend an appearance of competition.
Two less expensive, more direct alignments to the south, one of which was preferred by the Caltrans project manager, were rejected in favor of a more expensive and non-feasible route to the north. This would provide more unnecessary work for the consultants. The northern alignment would require land on Yerba Buena Island, owned by the Navy. The Navy refused to ever give permission to build the bridge there, joining a Congressional delegation and the City of San Francisco in expressing negative comments against the route. On October 10, 2000, in an end run around the Navy, Bill Clinton's corrupt Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater announced that the DOT would use its authority under federal law to transfer the title of the land needed on Yerba Buena Island to build the bridge. They used a legal loophole that allows federal land transfers for the Interstate Highway System, which includes the bridge. Please remember this point because the reasons will become apparent later.
Most of the finally chosen design had already been previously designed by Caltrans. A study of (barely audible) tape recordings of the meetings document that the designs were not compared to any criteria, much less engineering criteria. All the consultants decided to do was incorporate an unnecessary and seismically dangerous suspension bridge, for mere esthetics (and to drive up their fees).
EDAP could not reach a decision on the remaining four companies, so Caltrans wrote a proposal that the winning firm would have to share some of the spoils with the other three losers. Some of the EDAP members began to have second thoughts about the process, which caused the panel to begin to hold secret meetings with Caltrans, without informing the dissenting members. The final vote only had half the original 36 members. One engineer said "I am ashamed to be an engineer at the end of the 20th century and here in this process." A cynical Caltrans official confided it was "all about money."
The final design contract winner was T.Y. Lin. They will be paid tens of millions of dollars to design a bridge projected to cost $1.5 billion, if it is ever even built. A $1 toll surcharge was passed in August 1997 to help pay for this project. Then during the week of September 11, 2001, a bill was secretly guided through the California legislature that increased the spending limit to a total of $2.6 billion for the bridge.
The Bridge Design That Will Collapse
In a refrain that will again be heard on the east coast, the proposed bridge design by T.Y. Lin was engineeringly and physically impossible to build safely. Mr. Manabo Ito, Japan's most esteemed bridge engineer, and Professor Abolhassan Astaneh-Asi of U.C. Berkeley both condemned the bridge design as seismically unsafe. In fact, Dr. Astaneh pointed out that the MTC, in its rush to approve the more expensive northern alignment, forgot that it would cross an ice age submarine canyon. This could lead to underwater mud slides in an earthquake, thus bringing the whole bridge down. This necessitated shifting the route 1000' to the south, right into a shipping lane, and thus requiring an unstable single tower design, unlike any suspension bridge in the world. One of the main problems with the design is that it tries to incorporate two different types of structures, one of them an unneeded suspension bridge, which makes it inherently unstable in an earthquake because they will flex differently.
Dr. Astaneh stated: "There are no major bridges built using this system...In the literature there is almost no information about this so-called self-anchored suspension bridge system. Only Niels J. Gimsing, one of the most prominent bridge engineers of the world and Professor at Technical University of Denmark, has a short paragraph on [it] in his book...He considers this system inferior to other bridge systems."
In a 1999 letter to the MTC and Gov. Gray Davis, Dr. Astaneh said:
"I am now of the opinion that the new design has several fundamental seismic flaws that can result in very serious damage and possible partial or full collapse in the event of a major earthquake...[T]he system is inherently unstable...Even the scarce information released by the design team indicates that the tower (and there is only one!) will permanently bend 6 feet after their design earthquake and there will be serious damage to tower and other critical elements...
"The rational approach...would be to hire bridge engineering firms who designed seismic retrofit of all other major bridges in California and have them design a rational seismic retrofit for the existing East Bay Spans as they have done for all other major bridges. This can be done in the span of a few months...[S]uch retrofit should not cost more than $300M...This retrofit should have been done over the last ten years. After the existing bridge is fixed so we don't get killed on it, then a panel of bridge engineers can be assembled to develop a rational plan on what are the needs of a new bridge at this location..."
Just to show how unconcerned the parties involved were about safety, in 1999 EDAP admitted to the MTC that they had forgotten to design seismic monitoring equipment for the bridge, which isrequired by law. These black boxes allow monitoring of bridge stresses and help analyze cause of failure.
In spite of the above, T. Y. Lin International received the design contract for the Oakland bridge, which will be the largest contract ever awarded by the State of California.
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT DECLARES SUCH CONTRACTS ILLEGAL
In 1997, the California Supreme Court declared that Caltrans purposely reduced its engineering staff to justify allocating lucrative contracts to outside firms. The Legislative Analyst said that a consultant cost $151,000/year, 10-15% for oversight, whereas a Caltrans engineer cost $73,000/year. But the ruling was stayed on the grounds that the seismic contracts were an emergency.
Caltrans awards contracts to a limited number of firms on a rotating basis, who routinely donate hundreds of thousands of dollars to California gubernatorial campaigns.
On August 19, 1998, a Sacramento judge ruled that the seismic contracts were illegal and should be terminated. But the settlement exempted the Oakland Bay Bridge, and the state has continued to receive bills through the various impasses.
Similar Projects Successfully Challenged Elsewhere
In Washington several lawsuits are pending against the second Tacoma Narrows bridge. The $615 million design-build project was given to a partnership of Bechtel/Kiewit (sound familiar?). The Washington Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the state transportation agency had entered into an illegal contract (The News Tribune, 12/4/02). Other suits contend that the state illegally borrowed money without proper legislative approval.
BACKGROUND ON T.Y. LIN
It is interesting therefore to investigate the background of T.Y. Lin, both the man and the company that bears his name, because it sheds some light on why Bill Clinton and the state of California were trying to throw business their way. Much of the following information came from an interview with Lin to preserve "oral tradition" at Berkeley (Lin, 2001).
As you might have guessed, T.Y. Lin is Chinese. Lin, whose full name is Tung-Yen Lin, was born in China in 1912. Lin can trace his ancestry back to 1100 B.C., and there are 12 million members of the Lin family in China. His ancestors in his branch of the family had good positions in the government for the last twenty generations, being either magistrates or brigade generals. He is moved to tears when discussing his Chinese ancestry, but not when he talks about living in America. This shows where his true allegiance is, and friends agree his heart is in China.
In 1932 Lin came to U.C. Berkeley as a graduate student. He returned to Shanghai in 1933 and got a job with the Chinese Government Railways, soon becoming chief engineer. In 1946 Berkeley invited him back to teach. He is considered by some to be the greatest structural engineer in the world. He designed two New World Order (NWO) projects that have never been built: one, called the International Peace Bridge, would connect Russia and America through Siberia and Alaska. This would have enabled China to move its two hundred million man army into America (along with Russia). The second, sponsored by the UN, would cross the Straits of Gibraltar and link Spain with Morocco, through two 16,000' "superspans." These bridges are part of a global UN plan to construct a highway linking all the continents in an effort to promote world peace.
Lin Believes in a One-World Government and Religion
Like many Chinese, Lin was raised a Confucionist, studying the teachings of Confucious. He believes in what he calls the optimization of the Confucian concept of the golden mean, in a blend of the best of Chinese and Western cultures. Lin strongly believes in a one-world government. Notice how he makes it sound so "democratic":
"See, we can use some of the Chinese philosophy. China always believes in the world as one. But if it is under one control, we wouldn't like it. The world under one control? No. The world would be, if we organize the world as one, under maybe two hundred states, we would have the federal government and we would have the state government and then the county government and so forth. It may be done."
Lin has no belief in the God of Israel but believes that all religions are equal (i.e. a one-world religion). He said:
"We thought the European civilization is a very modern one. But it still retains some of the old ideas, particularly religious...I think China should be able to contribute a little to that...Chinese do not have that much religion as the Westerners. Westerners are getting away from it too...
"[W]ho is the real god we don't know...If you go into religions they are basically the same, whether you believe in Jesus Christ of Buddhism or whatever. I don't think they have that much difference."
When Lin designed the Gibraltar bridge between Europe and Africa, he was working for Bechtel which was commissioned by the UN. He said, "I think the importance of the bridge is to join not only the two continents...but the two religions, Muslim and Christian, and the people."
Lin Wants A Chinese "Democracy" Yet Defends the Government's Massacre at Tiananmen Square
Lin said of the terrible tragedy at Tiananmen Square, where government troops killed students protesting the government:
"So Den Xiao Ping had to maintain support of the army and to show the people he could play tough...You see, this kind of things [sic], Americans don't understand. The order was executed in a very bad massacre, but they had no choice. Even today, a few months ago, Jiang Ze Min declared, 'If we didn't have that massacre, which was bad, we wouldn't have today [sic]. We had to maintain order.' It's like a revolution. Heck with a thousand people killed. We're talking millions, billions of people. Americans don't understand that. It's a very bad thing, but there's no other choice."
Lin is very friendly with Chinese leaders. He told the president of the PRC that it was time for a stepped transition to "democracy." He is writing a book on U.S. democracy (the U.S. is not a democracy, but a republic) entitled The Problems of Aging Democracy. He said, "You see, democracy is now often carried too far in the USA. It is not an optimized situation. The Republicans and Democrats are fighting each other, more for gaining a stronger position than for optimization. For example, during the Clinton impeachment crisis and all of that."
Lin says the entire State Department understands China:
"[T]hey have studied China and I have some letters from them indicating that they understood. It's not the person; I think the whole State Department knows China and they help to keep this in balance. So Clinton had the advice of this State Department. I think Congress should never make foreign affairs a point of struggle between two parties. But recently this often happened."
Lin Was Friendly With Russians At Height of Cold War
Lin was on one occasion accused of being a Communist because he once wrote in a letter that "Communism may not be that bad." He travelled to Europe when he was young and learned a lot of general things there, and became friendly with some Russians. He later invited them to an engineering conference in July 1957 in San Francisco. The U.S. government didn't want them to see certain things here for national security reasons, such as concrete plants, but Lin showed them to the Russians anyway. The Russians asked him to bring a group back to Russia, which Lin did in November 1957, when the Russians fired Sputnik into space. The Russians made 3-4 return trips each year thereafter, and the State Department always asked Lin to entertain the Russians. The CIA also once asked him to meet one of their contacts in Berlin, which proves he has been at least peripherally involved in intelligence matters.
Lin's first trip to Russia inspired him to design the Peace Bridge between Russia and America. He received support from Senator Magnuson (D-Washington), who wanted Americans to be able to drive their children to Russia across the bridge, to improve our relationship. Lin also talked to oil companies, who wanted to put pipelines on the bridge to bring oil from Siberia to California.
Bear in mind that while Lin was schmoozing the Russians they were about to set up nuclear missiles ninety miles from America in Cuba.
Lin Chastised Reagan for Strategic Defense Initiative
Lin received the National Medal of Science at the White House in 1986. President Reagan awarded him the medal. Lin had the audacity to hand Reagan a picture of his proposed Peace Bridge between Russia and America, point his finger at Reagan and say "Mr. President, I have a proposal. If you build this bridge to Russia--you don't need Star Wars. We will understand each other and be at peace."
T.Y. Lin Sold to Muslims
T.Y. Lin International is headquartered in San Francisco, and Lin has set up over a dozen T.Y. Lin Associates across the globe. He opened a successful branch in Taiwan by bringing all Chinese employees. Just to show how the Chinese are not working alone in their activities, the president of T.Y. Lin is German.
The Chairman of the Board of T.Y. Lin, Dr. Man-Chung Tang, was elected in 2000 as a Foreign Member of the Chinese Academy of Engineering, the highest honorary and advisory organization for engineering and technology in China. This is the highest honor an engineer can receive in China. In 2001 Tang received an Honorary Professorship from Tsing Hua University in Beijing, China.
Lin sold T.Y. Lin International in 1985 to the employees and started Lin Tung Yen China, to do business solely in China, because he felt he had to give something back to China. The employees sold the company 2 years later to Dar Al Handasah, one of the largest engineering firms in the world. Dar is Jordanian with headquarters in London. Dar wouldn't pay the entire cost of the stock as promised and the matter is in court. Dar also owns the T.Y. Lin companies in Singapore and Taiwan. He tried unsuccessfully to buy the Hong Kong office.
The new head of the Taiwan office set up a design firm in China with Lin's name but without his knowledge. Evidently this was done with the Chinese government's blessing, because Lin complained to them but they ignored his complaints.
Some of Lin's projects globally have never even been bid. A dictator, such as an Arab sheik, would simply decide he wanted a particular project and pay Lin to design it.
Lin Tried to Unite Taiwan and China
Lin set up a meeting between Taiwan and China for the purpose of agreeing to build a bridge between the two across the Taiwan Strait (a minimum of 81 mi.), which he would design. He said that China, Taiwan and the U.S. are merely paper tigers. He said, "America is not going to conquer China. It's too big. USA just can't do that."
Lin Prepared the Development Plan for the Pudong Region of Shanghai
As mentioned previously, inferior China steel was manufactured by Shanghai Zhenhua Port Machinery, which is located in the Pudong region of Shanghai. This new industrial area was just developed in the last two decades, and primarily during Clinton's term. It just so happens that Lin was the instigator of the development of this region, and actually wrote the plan for its development, a 7-part, two-inch thick document.
Lin first met Chinese officials when he entertained them during their first visit to America in 1977, fours years after Nixon's visit to China in 1973. Lin first thought of developing Pudong as a youth, when he thought primarily of building a bridge for inhabitants, not for commerce. He mentioned the idea to the Chinese delegation in 1977. He presented a drawing of the bridge to the Shanghai government in 1980, who could see no reason for it. The idea lay dormant until the Shanghai mayor visited Lin in San Francisco in 1985.
Lin had been discussing with Dr. Albert Akl his development of a piece of land for a Saudi Arabian prince in the Silicon Valley. Lin told the Shanghai mayor they should do the same-sell foreigners land to raise money for the bridge and develop the region. After several paid trips to China, and numerous meetings, in 1988 the Chinese amended the constitution to allow the leasing of land to foreigners. (The government still owns all land in China.) That year, there was a high-level meeting of one to two hundred people at the Shanghai resort where Mao Tse Tung used to meet, to discuss the development of Pudong. Lin brought some major financial people with him from America.
Eventually the idea was sold to Den Xiao Ping, and the Pudong development became a matter of Chinese prestige, of national and international significance. At first there was a discussion between building a bridge or tunnel, but a bridge was built because it is more visible and symbolic.
The first bridge across the Huangpu (aka Hwang Pu) River, the Nanpu bridge, was finished in 1991. The second bridge, the Yangpu bridge, was completed in 1993. The bridges were named by Den Xiao Ping. The Yangpu has the longest span in the world, and the Nanpu is third. Lin gave a basic design for the first bridge to Shanghai, and said that the design for the Yangpu was copied from a picture of an Ohio bridge that he designed.
Around 1995 Bechtel invited the Pudong mayor to San Francisco and gave a party, where the mayor spoke. He said of Lin, "He not only initiated the idea [of Pudong development] and followed through but he would not take a penny for it." Lin said, "I'm just trying to help the country."
While China is proud of these and other similar bridges, T.Y. Lin engineers have privately admitted that these types of bridges, where construction begins from both ends, have a bad habit of being as much as 6' off where they meet in the middle. As discussed later, the bridge over the Cooper River in Charleston, S.C. is an exact replica of these Pudong bridges, and T.Y. Lin is supervising its construction.
Lin Wrong About Three Gorges Dam Concrete
I should also mention that in this 1999 interview, as an example that Lin is not infallible as portrayed, he was asked about the quality of China's construction of the controversial Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River. The interviewer said that "I've heard people who were concerned about whether their concrete work is good enough to do that." Lin replied there should be no problem, that the Chinese can do it. Now it turns out, in 2002, that even the Chinese government admits that cracks have appeared in the dam that "must be repaired carefully." Rumors have swirled around the dam of shoddy construction and extensive corruption. The government spokesman further said, "During the past three years, concrete placement in the project has not been first class, causing a variety of related accidents and drawbacks..."
Lin's International Bridges Could Facilitate War, Not Peace, With U.S. Tax Dollars
Suppose the U.S. decided to build T.Y. Lin's bridge between Russia and Alaska. This would be funded with U.S. tax dollars, of course. Suppose we later go to war with Russia and/or China. The bridge would offer the perfect route to rapidly move troops and war materiel. Imagine China quickly marching their 200 million man army into America across a bridge we built to promote "peace."
Sound farfetched? Something similar has already happened. In December 1979, the Soviet Union pounced on Afghanistan with a lightning-fast invasion. By the next day they had captured the capital of Kabul, which was overrun with Soviet tanks. You might wonder, how did 30-ton tanks get from the border across Afghanistan's supposedly rugged terrain in one night?
The answer is: on a well-constructed highway that you built for them (Sutton, 1986). There is a 647-mile highway between the Soviet Union and Kabul that was funded with your tax dollars. The project was completed in 1967 as part of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society for world peace. Engineers at the time said one 67-mile stretch, through the Salang Pass, was the most expensive ever seen. The bridges were not built for simple horse-drawn carts used by locals-they were built strong in anticipation of future use by Soviet heavy tanks in a military operation.
Now you can see that it would not be much of a stretch for the Russians/Chinese/North Koreans to do the same to us, if Lin's bridge were built. In fact, while our interstate highway system was supposedly promoted for military defense, it could serve as a two-edged sword should we ever be invaded, allowing our enemies to quickly strike deeper within our own country.
ONGOING FEDERAL INVESTIGATION OF CABLE BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
International Construction Firms Conspire Overseas
According to a Department of Justice news release (8/3/00):
"A federal grand jury in Boston today indicted an executive of a French construction firm -- Freyssinet International et Cie -- for conspiring to rig bids and allocate contracts for the sale of bridge products in the United States...The three bridges are: Charles River in Massachusetts, Maysville in Kentucky and Ohio, and Sidney Lanier in Georgia.
"The one-count felony indictment charged Jean Pierre Cagnat, the former chief executive officer of Freyssinet, with conspiring to rig bids in violation of the Sherman Act from September 1996 until December 1997. The indictment charges that in carrying out the conspiracy, Cagnat and co-conspirators met in London, England and agreed to participate in a bid rotation scheme. They carried out the conspiracy by exchanging price information for upcoming stay cable system bids, and submitting noncompetitive, rigged bids on the projects. [emphasis added]
"Freyssinet was awarded the stay cable construction contract for the Charles River bridge which is part of the Boston Central Artery Project, known as the 'Big Dig.'...
"This is the fourth case brought in the Department's ongoing antitrust investigation of the cable-stayed bridge construction industry.
"In September 1999, Freyssinet International et Cie pleaded guilty to rigging bids on cable-stayed bridge projects and was fined $720,000. Dywidag-Systems International USA Inc. and its former President and CEO...also pleaded guilty and were fined $571,000 and $25,000, respectively... [That's like a parking ticket-JS]
"The ongoing investigation involving the specialty construction industry [i.e. cable bridges-JS] is being conducted by the Antitrust Division's San Francisco Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Department of Transportation, Office of Inspector General in San Francisco."
Overseas Conspiracy Is Easy-Who Else Is Involved?
The above points up to one of the main problems with allowing overseas construction firms to do business in the U.S. It is a simple matter for their representatives to meet at some undisclosed foreign location to divvy up the bids. It will be difficult, if not impossible, for the appropriate state and federal agencies to know. For example, in the indictment against Cagnat, it is stated: "4. For the purpose of forming and carrying out the charged combination and conspiracy, the defendant and his co-conspirators did those things that they combined and conspired to do, including, among other things: a. participating in a meeting in London, England in or about September 1996 to discuss bids on stay cable systems; b. agreeing, during the 1996 London meeting, [emphasis added] to participate in a bid rotation scheme for stay cable systems;..."
From the fact that the exact time and place of the meeting were not given in the indictment, we must wonder: How much information did the federal government have about the meeting? It may that they only cracked the case when one of the defendants got scared and testified.
This happened in another incident in which Freyssinet was fined $800,000 by the Canadian government. The case was only prosecuted when Switzerland's VAL Corp. was granted immunity in exchange for its volunteered testimony in a bid-rigging case for a concrete reinforcement system in Newfoundland.
The U.S. indictment also states: "Various corporations and individuals, not made defendants in this Indictment, participated as co-conspirators in the offense charged..." So which other firms participated? Only a second firm has been charged that I know of: Dywidag. These are not the only two suppliers of cable systems-in order to effectively rig bids, more suppliers would have to be involved. And if the prime contractors chose the cable suppliers, were they too involved? Obviously, all of the above casts aspersions upon the integrity of the entire industry.
Perhaps it is only coincidence, but the "Big Dig" is being constructed by Atkinson-Kiewit (mentioned previously) which hired Freyssinet. And T.Y. Lin constructed the Sidney Lanier Bridge using a Freyssinet cable system.
Other Techniques Used-Deliberately Underbidding
While not directly related to cable bridges, another example of how fraud can be conducted is seen in the countersuit by the Port of Los Angeles against the world's largest construction firm, Kajima Corp. out of Tokyo. Kajima was supposed to replace a bridge was $12.5 million overbudget. They sued for $35 million in damages, and consequently countersued by the Port of LA. From www.sfgate.com (6/27/00):
"[T]he Harbor Department alleges...that Kajima officials deliberately underbid the project even though they knew the company was incapable of carrying out the required work. The lawsuit contends that the unrealistically low bid was part of a broad effort by Kajima to recover business after the parent company was suspended in the mid-1990s from obtaining public contracts in Asia because of bribery scandals and other criminal activity."
As will be discussed later, a company could deliberately gain contracts by underbidding just to obtain the opportunity to sabotage our infrastructure.
A WORD ABOUT GOVERNOR GRAY DAVIS
Anyone familiar with Gray Davis knows he is basically a mirror image of Bill Clinton. If you recall there were also allegations of massive vote fraud in his election as well. Davis is a socialist who is happy doing business with communist China or any other such country, and cares nothing for America. In his first public appearance at Stanford after he was elected governor of California, he gave a speech entitled "California and Asia: Partners for the Future." The venue was Stanford's Asia/Pacific Research Center, part of Stanford's Institute for International Studies. This is nothing but a think tank to implement policies for the Committee of 300, and it is obvious that Davis' appearance merely illustrated his obedience to his handlers.
In other examples of Davis and his globalist pals' agenda, he met with Mexican President Zedillo in 1999, and promised that he would not allow another Proposition 187, the 1995 initiative to end government services for immigrants. In another incident, Davis and President Clinton shared a private box at the Rose Bowl in 1999 in the Women's World Cup soccer match between China and the U.S. Clinton told the Chinese that the U.S. was honored by their presence, that he hoped the match would ease China-U.S. tensions, and that the two countries could build a peaceful future.
Like Clinton, Davis has a documented history of lying, physical violence, histrionics and extreme profanity, though he is protected by the news media. One former officer staffer said, "I guess Gray's biggest lie is pretending that he operates within the bounds of normalcy, which is not true. This is not a normal person. I will never forget the day he physically attacked me, because even though I knew he had done it before to many others, you always want to assume that Gray would never do it to you, or that he has finally gotten help."
During the recent flap over the Pledge of Allegiance, Davis said he didn't get the state to enter into a defense because they weren't informed of the lawsuit. But U.S. court documents show that in March 2000 the summons was sent by certified mail and received by the Attorney General's office.
It might be worth giving an example of how Davis has failed to keep his own word and values the well-being of globalists over that of his own constituents. When he campaigned for governor, he publicized his military service and promised to help veterans if elected. He signed a bill after his election strengthening the requirement that 3% of state contracts go to disabled veterans. But after he announced with much publicity the $187.8 Carquinez bridge contract, it turns out that only $116,000 worth of subcontracts will be granted to disabled vets, who should have instead received $5.6 million worth of work. Davis would rather side with international construction firms than local veterans. The general manager of one of the winning companies said he refused to hire disabled veterans' firms if they were more expensive because "[w]e don't want to lose a project because we're going with higher numbers."
In a recent well-publicized scandal which illustrates Davis' NWO leanings, one of his officials took a $25,000 contribution from Larry Ellison's software company Oracle, which had just received a controversial $95 million state contract for software that was never used. Northrop Grumman was hired by the state as a consultant and stood to earn $28 million on the deal. Oracle got its start by working for the CIA and Ellison is a NWO flunkie who volunteered Oracle's free services for a national ID card. Two of his appointees resigned while the FBI opened up an investigation, and state officials investigated a report of document shredding. Officials have testified under oath that they were pressured not to stand in the way of the contract.
Davis has pulled down $1,800/hr. in contributions for the last five years, and demonstrated that he is just another politician who will take money from anyone who is handing it out. Democrats are supposed to be for the "environment," but three months after receiving $100,000 from timber interests, he opposed a $22 million timber tax. Since 1999, they have given him $450,000. Davis allowed a San Francisco Bay refiner, one of California's largest polluters, to increase its pollution after giving him a $75,000 campaign contribution. Davis also took $200,000 in a secret meeting with Archer Daniels Midlands and then banned MBTE, in favor of ethanol, produced by ADM. The plumbers union donated $1.3 million to Davis, and then the state Building Standards Commission voted to ban plastic pipe to carry water into homes. The bankrupt company Worldcom gave Davis $13,000 in March and April last year, whereupon Davis canceled the current prison contract for phone service and gave it to Worldcom.
Over the last ten years, California has gone to more no-bid contracts, which led Gov. Pete Wilson to issue strict guidelines to agencies, but which have become more lenient in recent years. The state of California has a current budget deficit of more than $20 billion, and which is understandable in light of all the money wasted on highway construction and other pork barrel expenditures. This is no surprise since his second largest contributor group is development interests, giving $6.3 million since 1997. It should be noted that historically, a significant amount of irresponsible development in California has been made illegally in mudslide-prone areas because of corruption, bribery, etc. of government officials.
Davis has used Enron-type accounting magic in developing his budget. Some examples are under-reported expenditures, off-balance sheet liabilities, overstated income and ignoring the future year (Orange County Register, 7/5/02). As a result of the above outlined criminal financial activities, California faces the distinct possibility of economic collapse (Sacramento Bee, 7/19/02). The Department of Finance reported revenues 5.7% below their forecast in June, and the May and June sales tax was about 5% short. If this trend continues, the gap between expenditures and revenue could reach $20 billion in one year.
The Davis administration has been so corrupt that on September 25, 2002, the Republican National Committee Chairman Mark Racicot said that they would give $1-2 million to Davis' Republican opponent while the California Secretary of State asked John Ashcroft to open a federal investigation into bribery and racketeering charges against the Davis administration (www.bayarea.com). The result of all of Davis' corruption and mismanagement is a budget deficit "so deep and so vast that even if we fired every single person on the state payroll-every park ranger, every college professor and every Highway Patrol officer-we would still be more than $6 billion short" (Herb Wesson, Democratic California Assembly speaker, quoted in The New York Times, 12/9/02).
In the context of the above, some of Caltrans' questionable practices become more understandable.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Sutton, A.C. The Best Enemy Money Can Buy. 1986.
T.Y. Lin, "The Father of Prestressed Concrete': Teaching Engineers, Bridging Rivers and Borders, 1931 to 1999," an oral history conducted in 1999 by Eleanor Swent, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 2001.
Serving Freedom
and Liberty
